Is Direct Drive Really Better?

Some good info before the thread veered sharply downward. I'm going to conclude from this meager participation that direct drive is a better performer than belt and few people are aware of the fact. And at least one person thinks that rim drive is better yet. I wonder.

Zaikesman,
I feel myself being pulled in your direction. I replaced nearly $10K (used value) worth of separates with a $700 integrated amp that actually sounded better. Boy did that ever feel good. I'm currently looking to see if I can accomplish something like that with my analog. That's how this thread started actually. I did something similar with speakers and cables.
Tom

Interesting comment, Drubin. However, it could be that CD does kick butt in the area of speed stability but loses out on other aspects of continuity due to "bits is bits" fragmentation. You can't grind steak into hamburger and then make steak again no matter how constant the speed of the grinder or the ungrinder.

What I remember about the rise of belt drive at the expense of DD was the feud between Ivor of Linn and Michael of SOTA. It went on for years to the delight of the audio press. It seemed to be staged in much the same way as the WWF feuds. It caused audiophiles to choose sides concerning which suspended table they preferred. VPI and Oracle were also both ascending and the unsuspended direct drive tables were forgotten. A few years later, digital took over.
Now that the belt drives are all going unsuspended, we're again looking at direct drive and seeing that they actually outperform even the most prestigious belts.
This is what I felt when I asked the question but I was wondering what sort of agreement or controversy I might find. So far, I have 1 noncommittal, 2 agreements and someone who thinks I'm joking. What's your opinion?

Goldmund made a direct drive table and I've heard that the final version of the Rockport was DD. A poster above mentioned the Monaco turntable that appears poised to surpass all existing turntables in measurements and sonics. The Technics SL 1200 must by now be one of the best selling tables of all time. All these things point toward a degree of superiority.
I think we were led astray by the audio press when we started to prefer belt drive categorically. I'll be interested to see if a cost no object rim drive appears. Or the long rumored Bose chain drive diesel table with direct reflecting mirrored platter mat and Gabriel suspension. And long overdue -- they intend to offer a left handed tonearm with organic butter damping.
I can't wait to see Fremer gush over that one.

More like a series of jokes. Sort of like the turntable with the schtick shift. And I didn't get ole CW making a prediction. He came across to me as condescending, as if my question had no merit.
4yanx, as usual, provided a cogent observation. This time it was his comment about buzz. I have sensed for a while now that there is a definite revival of direct drive in the works and I was fishing with my question to see who, if anyone else, had the same sense. Seems like there are a few.

I've reread my last post repeatedly in search of the comment that triggered the Immodium and bloody shorts remarks.I guess I'm going to need an explanation.
Immodium is for the control of diarrhea not for relief of constipation.I looked it up.
As for blood in my shorts -- is that a gender driven slight? If so, you are addressing the wrong gender.
And if you want to find a direct drive turntable that can beat a medium priced belt drive, I can help you with that and it appears that Psychicanimal can as well.
What is it about this thread that is causing you boys to giggle and smirk? Where are the observations about the relative merits of DD versus belt? How about establishing some of the trade offs between the two. Someone earlier stated that there are definite trade offs. What are they?
Have your fun, if you must but I'm looking for more than jokes. I already know how clever some of you can be and I enjoy the repartee but must it be either or? Aren't you deft enough to intermingle the humor with useful contributions. 4yanx does this well and Viridian typically splays adroitly.
No one has seen fit to comment on my suspended tables theory. Doesn't it seem in retrospect that the entire consumer market has been swayed by a little postulation and a lot of press on more than one occassion? Do you think that Harry Pearson has done more harm than good?

I understand fully well that any approach can be mishandled or compromised by price point considerations, sheer ineptitude or misdirection. Let those units go. They are not intended to influence this discussion.
Taking the best efforts in each of the various turntable drive options into consideration, do you believe any drive system to have an inherent design superiority. Is belt slack and take-up an insurmountable obstacle? Is there magnetic influence on the cartridge from the motor as your arm nears the center of the record on direct drive tables? Wouldn't it be better to rely on constant drive of the platter rather than requiring momentum for speed stability? How the heck can an idler wheel not transfer rumble? Is chain drive really dead? Can analysis be worthwhile........?

Seandtaylor99,
Please understand that I am not an engineer. What I pose here is speculative and lay in the extreme.
Consider that your stylus is being driven through obstacles such as a narrowing of the groove or some groove pattern of exceptional complexity. Or it is being dragged through by a belt with the aid of momentum. It seems that at the point of immediate resistance a mass no matter how great will hesitate slightly when confronted with the aforementioned obstacle. I imagine that a large motor directly driving the platter would not hesitate at this time. Further it seems that at take up a belt would stretch a bit momentarily.
As for vibration, I remember from my 1970s era audio sales days that higher end DD tables had rumble figures unimagineable to the belt drive units.

Sean,
Assuming nothing about relative sizes of car and boulder, and knowing nothing about polar moments (sounds like a phrase from a travel brochure) I would surmise that the boulder would be slowed somewhat by your body since it was coasting whereas the car which is actively powered could be completely unaffected by your presence in its path.
What I'm imagining here makes perfect sense to me but that does not mean I'm sure it is supported by physics. Does someone out there have a background in physics and an opinion on this matter?

Johnnantais,
I appreciate your contribution here. It's more like what I was seeking when I asked about this topic. I'm aware of your Despot thread but it's so huge now I can't even find the end of it.
What do you think about the Thorens 124? I took an interest in that until I found out it has an iron platter that attracts cartridge magnets. Is that a valid concern?

4yanx,
Your observations registered on this end as both wonderfully incisive and appropriately cynical.
I think that the Chinese idler wheel turntable might appear if Schifter or Nudell or someone of that ilk finds the demographics are there to support such an endeavor. Perhaps we'll be seeing the Johnnantais Signature Model with the new Lega arm.

This is truly a case of getting the cart before the horse ...and arguing that it belongs there.
The real issue is what performs better in actuality and not what should sound better. If we find that we are getting better results from one approach, then theorizing about why is appropriate but speculation about which SHOULD be better is pretty useless.
The question that started this discussion asked which IS better, not which should be.

Thanks, Zaikesman, I was wondering about that taste until you pointed to my foot in my mouth. I did, rather pointedly, ask for opinions.
I've read some very good arguments on all three sides and it seems that not much has been determined about superiority or inferiority. As someone said, the head to head comparison is not something that can be done with any precision, measurements are just measurements and all sonic evaluations are subjective, so it seems to come down to one of those Joe Louis vs. Mohammed Ali debates where everything is based on projection and extrapolation.

I was fishing for a consensus of some kind and it appears that presently there isn't any but as I said earlier I sense a developing inclination back toward DD and maybe 4yanx is correct to call it "buzz". Nonetheless, it may be that the fracture in our ranks has something to do with "buzz" vulnerability. It may just be that mine is pretty high.
I've been using a Well Tempered Reference table for 12 years but in the past month or so I have acquired an SP-10, an SL 1100a, an SL 150 MK II,and a Luxman PD 441 for evaluation. The WTT is for sale now and I'm looking forward to evaluating the buzz. A friend has predicted that I will find the Luxman to be the best of what I have. Has anyone else used one?

Since Teres makes one of the leading belt drive tables and has made quite a name for itself in so doing, I would say that their announcement weighs heavily in favor of DD superiority.
Again the question ------ at what price point?
Like Viridian, I value actual experience over projections and calculations and I suspect Chris at Teres has experimented with and tested turntables more in the last several years than all of us put together. For him to change directions so radically, I have to assume that he found more than just a likelihood that DD has greater potential than the belt drive with which he has enjoyed so much success.

Drubin,
I have a friend who insists that perception is reality. There's something about the comment that disturbs me but there's nothing there for me to contradict. That said, I certainly wouldn't think to kick you out of the club. In fact, your candor is grounds for promotion. I would guess from your writings that you would be more comfortable with 4yanx in the hearing dept. than with seandtaylor in statistics.
Personally I wouldn't consider a thread successful until it attracted your comments.

Mint604,
You bring up an interesting point. All (4 now) drive systems require some kind of maintenance and I suppose it should be a condideration in these comparisons. All the other motors need lubrication and yours requires nutrition. The IW has the most moving parts and would presumably be the highest maintenance system. BD probably only ever needs a new belt although I guess bearings and springs could also wear. With DD the only issue beyond lubrication would be the potential for motor failure and that would be fatal I imagine to a vintage table. Does your rat work quietly?

Zaikesman,
My SP-10 MK II has a motor assembly with a top plate and the platter is fastened to that top plate by 3 flat head screws. On my SL 1100A, the arrangement is similar but the platter simply rests on the top plate without any fasteners. I also have an SL 150 MK II and that is similar to what you describe in the 1200 where the platter is an integral part of the motor.
The question remains however whether these DD models remain perfectly concentric in response to stylus drag or are spun off kilter by their looser bearings structures. I think that was what TWL was saying.
I questioned him about this because it appears that my DD tables are not vulnerable in the way he described. Maybe they are.
I also have a Luxman PD 441 and it has a magnetic mechanism which reduces the platter weight on the bearing by 80%. Is this better or worse in relation to Tom's premise?

TWL -- Glad you could make it. Upon looking at the design of my Technics DD, I see that there is no main bearing per se but rather a broad based rotor/stator interface. The notion of that being rocked or deviated from its center seems remote given its diameter, mass and magnetic hold. After all it isn't a pencil point on a hard disk balancing a 12 inch diameter spinning disk. With the Technics table the motor is about 4 inches in diameter and in the case of the SP-10 it is screwed to the motor assembly. Very stable.
I also wonder to what extent the gyroscope effect might assist in stability in both designs. Does the platter spin too slowly for that to be meaningful. I have observed that a spinning top is rather stable at high speeds but loses that stability as its rotation slows. Does diameter of the top add to its stability to overcome slowing? Is 33 1/3 fast enough to have this influence?
Time for Seandtaylor and the physicists to come back to the discussion. I'm just tossing out questions that I can't answer.

I don't purport to know anything about idler wheel drive systems and I would be very open to trying one. My principle hesitations are first that I wouldn't know how to acquire a Lenco and I don't have any mechanical skills whatsoever. Mounting a cartridge is on the outer reaches of my adroitness so the prospect of keeping a mechanically complex drive system operational appears discouraging.
What do you say to people like me?

Zaikesman,
I think I understand your point. Recreation of the original performance requires retracing the original steps at the original pace. Or in other words the duplicate must be exactly symmetrical to the original in order to precisely mimic it in reverse -- mistakes included.
The concept is simple enough but saying it so that others can understand my meaning isn't quite so simple.

Phd- That's a very old story and it is not supported by rumble figures as far as I know. I've read that the resonant frequency of the drive motor and bearing in a good DD is like 5 Hz or something. It's supposed to be too low for the cartridge to pick up. I also remember a tale about ID tables developing a flat spot in the rubber idler wheel if left idle and engaged for too long. I think that last one was started by the tooth fairy.

Phd- Isolation has improved as we have become more aware of it. Your direct drive experience might have been due to feedback. Or it could have been an inexpensive direct drive. Several posters have noted that cheapo DD tables tarnished the rep of the genre back in the day.

Albert,
I think that's a tremendous observation. A lot of people bickering about a subset and we've perhaps forgotten that we are all talking because of our agreement on a larger point which is the benefits of analog. Thanks for bringing that to my attention.

Like the turntable itself, this topic goes round and round.

Vitality is vital. Essential. Quintessential.
I never have heard any turntable I own wowing, fluttering or hunting. Perhaps I'm not critical or astute enough to observe these faults but I suspect I am happier being unaware of them.
Like that burned out pixel, it doesn't bother you at all until you notice it and then it can't be overlooked. Seems like the more you train your ear, the more it costs you.
I think I'm going to sell all my turntables except one direct drive. WOW!

Drubin,
You've hit upon a great idea. Talk about a crowd attraction. Denver is pretty central in terms of U.S. geography and RMAF in October would be a terrific site since it is likely that the principal competitors might all be there anyway. The only hangups would be classification and maybe ground rules.
Should we start a new thread for this topic or just keep going here? Obviously we would see older and probably reconditioned models for Idler Drive and no holds barred new stuff for belt. I imagine that it would be NOS DDs unless the Monaco might show up. Who are going to be the judges? Will it be a panel like in the Olympics where each judge holds up a card with their score and then we average them?
More comments and ideas, please.

Nothing much to worry about, TWL. The existing stock of affordable DD tables is small and stable and the concensus here says that mass produced DD will never again be seen. So there really isn't much need for concern about buyers responding to a wrong impression about superiority.
The reference to spec wars was funny. I still have a copy of the October, 1987 Audio Magazine Annual Equipment Directory(The Industry Bible) boasting on the cover that it contains more than 4,300products and over 75,000 specs.
What a feast for numbers people. 62 Hz, 89 rpm, 16%. WOW! Doesn't that just give you goosebumps?

Psychoticanimal,
I have read that the Constitution and Declaration of Independance were both written on hemp paper. At one time farmers were required to grow the stuff to help pay for the war. Another interesting fact is that the war effort was equipped and capitalized by the harvesting of native Ginseng. Seems the stuff that grew wild in Virginia was the best in the world and we were able to trade with Asia for things we could not produce. You know, like cameras and televisions and cars.
Currently we are returning to those days when we imported almost everything. Can I get a witness?

It seems that we all agree that no turntable and no drive system can accomplish theoretical perfection, and some of us feel that today's best are good enough. I'm in that group because I have been impressed throughout this discussion with the knowledge that I can't afford anything appreciatively better than what I have. Fortunately I like it.

Chuck,
Initially I posed the question because of curiosity and an instinct that perhaps DD had been sent away prematurely by a trend that was propagated by an audio press I distrust and by a need for isolation which was addressed by suspending turntable chassis rather than evacuating unwanted energy. The suspended turntable trend naturally favored BD.
With the subsequent development of isolation platforms and vibration control, I wondered if it might be that DD is really superior after all and should be revisited.
What I've gotten from this is a strong awareness of controversy. There are strong arguements on both (actually three) sides so I would be less sure than when I started if not for learning about the Grand Prix Racing Monaco and Chris Brady's plans to develop a Teres DD. I mean, look at it, one of the pre-eminent BD designers says that after extensive experimentation he has concluded that DD has greater ultimate potential. Who among the respondents to this thread brings greater credibility?
So I am selling my Well Tempered Reference Table that I have used for 12 years and a slew of DD tables I don't like as well as my Luxman PD 441. There is a Technics SP 10 MK II, an SL 150 MK II and a Technics SL 1100A. They are all strong, stable and good sounding but I like the look and feel of the Luxman better and it has more of a sense of pace and drive. I also have a Yamaha PX-2 which is well made and beautifully designed with tangential tracking but it is a bit too gizmo for me. It might go to my kids since it is fully automatic and you can do everything except change records with the dustcover closed.
I think that, as it stands today, high end vintage DD on the used market represents the most bang for the buck in analog playback.

OY! The suspense is killing me. 4yanx, who is it? Who brings greater credibility?

P.A. may be waiting for me to apologize for calling him psychotic although, if he really is psychic he surely knows I meant no harm.
I've assumed from first hearing of it that Teres is looking to raise the bar not the bar graph. If Chris was looking to sell more tables, he'd be designing Teres Jr. for mass consumption rather than some ambitious project that I won't be able to consider buying.

O.K. Everyone seems to agree that we don't like vibrations and everyone seems to believe that speed stability is of great importance. The only diagreement I've heard has to do with which is more important. Doesn't it seem that bringing them both to manageable levels concurrently should be well within reach given what has already been accomplished?
Likewise it would seem that all of these 3 drive systems are capable of performance levels approaching perfection. So there are three best approaches and none are inherently inferior. Is anyone going to switch as a result of reading or participating in this thread?

I was there too. Although I left before Dan arrived, I was able to spend a couple of hours with Chris and his son Ryan comparing the 380 direct drive with his 320 and the new more affordable 280. All three tables were quite distinct in sound. I was initially impressed by the appearance of the 380 in that it very nicely finished and to my eye was more attractive than even the drop dead gorgeous 320. The word "prototype" always causes me to imagine some Rube Goldberg contrivance with wires and switches dangling. This piece looked ready for the Smithsonian.
"Humiliated" has a very a malicious overtone to it so I guess I would question it's usage as well, but to say that the 380 completely eclipsed the 320 would certainly be true and it wouldn't sound quite so deliberate. The 380 has a brash and very striking appearance compared to the softer all wood appearance of the other two. But it's sound is more natural, easier and more commanding. There is more nothing about it. While it's appearance is more striking, it's sound is decidedly less conspicuous. Easier and less as if there is any mechanical assistance to the retrieval of signal.
For the minutiae fans, there is room to question the results as there were different arms and cartridges involved, but all cartridges were ZYX and both of the arms I heard came from the top drawer. The 380 had a Schroeder and a Universe and the other two used the Moerch DP-6 and an Airy3.
The only specs I can recall was the weight of the 380 at 135 lbs. and the price as projected should drop in very near that of the Grand Prix Monaco.
Beautiful house and the Brady Bunch were extremely cordial.
They live in Broomfield, halfway between Boulder and Denver and Chris knows his stuff and hosts a really warm party. Get in touch with Teres and see if you can wrangle an invite to the next open house. It was a hoot.

4yanx,
I can't place either the 320 or 380 in the hierarchy of world class turntables. I imagine they belong there but I don't know the competition at all. Relative to each other, the difference is obvious and convincing. The 380 was easily the best turntable at Chris Brady's house that day. We now have established that one manufacturers only DD is better than his best BD. Does that bring us any closer to a conclusion about the opening question?

Dan, I don't want to steer this thread toward Zu so I'll email you privately about that.
That comparison is intriguing to consider given that in the day of the SP-10 there really wasn't an arm or cartridge like Chris used and isolation and cabling hadn't really even gotten started. Just how close can you get to a 380 using an older DD and modern ancillaries? I bet the performance difference is a fraction of the price difference.

I also remember him using a clear belt.

My son, who was with me at the Teres show, said the 380 had more pluck. I guess that more or less sums what Dan_Ed was saying about the difference.
Dan, where you wrote IMHO above, Does that mean "in my humiliated opinion"?

I find myself wondering where something like a Technics SP-10 would fit into that hierarchy. It has the torque but not the platter mass of 380. Would it outperform a 320? If not, why not?